».     '-*eT 


w 


X. 


■xv: 


■■^^^■x 


■f 


Tlie    I»roperly 

OF    TUB 


HI 

''  r  I  MY"'.''  ""■'/■ 

BARTON    SQUARE,    SALEM. 


DEPOSITED 


—  IN    line  — 


LIBRARY 


—  OF    THK  — 


ESSEX    INSTITUTE. 


»v.     ^' 


^  .•>      ' 


CURSORY   REMARKS 


REY.  DR.  WORCESTER'S  SECOND  LETTER 


ON  THE  SUBJECT   OF    THE 


TRINITY. 


BY  A  LAYMAN, 

The  Author  of  the  Language  of  Scripture  respecting  Christ,  &c. 
Avho  believes,  that  "  there  is  One  God,  the  Father,  of  -whom 
are  all  things,  and  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  are  all 
things — And  that  the  Father  seat  the  Sou  to  be  the  Saviour 
of  the  world." 


BOSTON : 


PRINTED   BY   JOHN   ELIOT. 
1815. 

5u 


^o,oii:i/ 


CURSOEY  REMARKS. 


WE  very  Avell  understand  what  is  implied  and 
meant  by  the  term  "  orthodoxy/'  in  modern  times  : 
and  we  well  know  the  object  of  those  who  monopolize 
it.  By  ^^  orthodoxy''^  they  mean  their  own  peculiar 
opinions,  viz.  Athanasianism,  as  it  regards  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  ;  and  Calvinism,  as  it  respects 
depravity,  election,  irresistible  grace,  &c.  But  it  will 
not  be  admitted,  as  Dr.  Worcester  aa  ould  pretend, 
that  such  were  the  doctrines  of  the  holy  apostles,  or 
that  their  preaching  was  of  this  cast.  When,  there- 
fore, the  Dr.  suggests,  that  orthodox  sentiments  ;  that 
is,  (according  to  liis  view)  the  correct  and  true  doc- 
trines of  the  gospel,  are  not  received  by  Unitarians, 
we  humbly  conceive  he  speaks  without  proof.  This 
is  rather  an  artful,  than  an  ingenuous  suggestion. 
He  must  and  does  know,  that  those  whom  he  accuses 
of  heterodoxy,  profess  to  adhere  fully  and  entirely  to 
the  plain  language  and  meaning  of  the  gospel ;  and 
endeavour  to  preach  as  did  the  apostles,  rather  than 
follow  Mhanasius,  St.  Augustin,  Calvin  or  IJopTcins. 
We  will  quote  some  expressions  of  the  inspired  apos- 
tles, and  see  whether  the  Unitarians  do  not  now  use 
similar  language. 

"  Ye  men  of  Israel,"  said  Peter,  in  his  first  ad* 
dress  to  the  Jews,  "hear  these  words,  Jesus  of  Naz- 
areth, a  man  approved  of  God  among  you,  by  mira- 


cles  and  wonders,  which  God  did  by  him  in  the  midst 
of  you  all — ye  have  taken  and  with  wicked  hands 
have  crucified  and  slain  ;  whom  God  has  raised  up" 
from  the  dead.  This  Jesus  God  has  raised  up,  and 
exalted  to  his  right  hand ;  and  liaving  received  of 
the  Father  the  promise  of  the  holy  spirit,  he  lias  shed 
forth  this  which  ye  see  and  hear ;"  that  is,  the  mira- 
cles performed  by  the  apostles.  '^  Therefore,  let  all 
the  house  of  Israel  be  assured,  that  God  has  made 
this  Jesus,  whom  ye  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ :'' 
— And  when  they  enquired,  what  shall  we  do,  Peter 
said,  "  repent  and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins." 

In  his  second  address  to  the  Jews,  when  questioned 
about  the  miracle  he  had  performed  on  the  lame  man 
at  the  gate  of  the  temple,  Peter  said,  ^^  ye  men  of  J  srael, 
why  marvel  ye  at  this,  or  why  look  ye  so  stedfastly 
on  us,  as  though  we  had  done  it  by  our  own  power? 
The  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  the  God  of 
our  fathers  has  glorified  his  son  (or  child)  Jesus, 
whom  ye  denied  and  delivered  up,  &c. — God  has 
raised  him  from  the  dead  ;  and  his  name,  by  faith  in 
his  name  has  restored  this  man — Unto  you  first,  God 
having  raised  up  his  Son  Jesus,  sent  him  to  bless  you, 
by  turning  you  from  your  iniquities."  Again,  when 
interrogated  on  the  same  subject,  Peter  said,  ^'  Be  it 
known  unto  you  all,  that  by  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ 
of  Njizareth,  whom  ye  crucified,  whom  God  raised 
from  the  dead,  even  by  him  does  this  man  stand  be- 
fore you  whole.  This  is  the  stone  which  was  set  at 
nought  by  you  builders,  which  is  become  (made)  the 
head  of  the  corner.  Neither  is  there  salvation  in  any 
other.  For  there  is  no  other  name  given,  under  hea- 
ven, whereby  we  can  lie  saved." — Again,  ^'  We  ought 
to  obey  God,  rather  than  man  :  The  God  of  our  fa- 
thers raised  up  Jesus  m  horn  ye  slew  ;  Him  God  has 
exalted  at  his  right  hand,  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour, 
to  give  repentance  and  forgiveness  of  sins."  When 
Peter  was  sent  to  instruct  Cornelius,  he  said,  '^  God 
anointed  Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  tlie  holy  spirit  and 


with  (miraculous)  power — and  God  was  with  liim. 
The  Jews  slew  him,  and  hanged  him  on  a  tree  ;  but 
God  raised  him  from  the  dead.  And  he  commanded 
us  to  preach  to  the  people  and  to  testify,  that  it  is  he 
who  was  ordained  of  God,  to  be  the  Judge  of  the  liv- 
ing and  dead — to  him  all  the  prophets  bear  testimony 
that  through  his  name,  whosoever  believeth  on  him 
shall  have  remission  of  sins." 

The  preaching  of  Paul,  after  his  conversion,  was 
to  the  same  effect.  ''  He  proved  to  the  Jews,  that 
Jesus  was  the  very  Christ,  or  Messiah — and  preach- 
ed to  them  that  he  was  the  Son  of  God'' — "  Of  this 
man's  (David)  seed,  God  has,  according  to  his  prom- 
ise, raised  up  unto  Israel,  a  Saviour,  even  Jesus. — 
And  we  declare  unto  you  glad  tidings,  that  the  prom- 
ise, which  w  as  made  to  the  fathers,  God  has  fulfilled 
the  same  to  us,  their  children,  in  that  he  has  raised  up 
Jpsiis  igain  ;  as  it  is  written  in  the  second  psalm, 
^  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  I  have  begotten  thee' — 
Be  it  known  unto  you,  therefore,  men  and  brethren, 
that  through  this  man  is  preached  unto  you  the  for- 
giveness of  sins."  His  language  in  tlie  epistles  is  in 
subslance  the  same.  He  teaches,  "  that  we  are  justi- 
fied freely  by  the  grace  of  God,  through  tiie  redemp- 
tion which  there  is  in  Christ  Jesus  ;  whom  God  has 
appointed  a  propitiation  through  faith  for  the  remission 
of  sins." 

Many  of  his  expressions  are  to  be  considered 
with  reference  to  the  strange,  absurd  and  dangerous 
tenets  of  the  Jewish  teachers,  that  if  they  conformed 
to  the  ritual  of  Moses  and  observed  the  traditions  of 
the  rabbis,  they  would  be  saved,  whatever  might  be 
their  moral  character.  This,  Paul  laboured  to  shew 
was  a  most  erroneous  and  a  most  dangerous  doctrine. 
And  that  faith  in  Clirist,  as  the  Messiah,  and  repent- 
ance towards  God  for  all  sin,  with  future  holiness  of 
life,  were  essentially  necessary  to  salvation.  His  first 
great  object  w  as  to  prove,  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was 
the  promised  and  long  expected  Messiah;  and  that 
he  was  to  be  received  and  obeyed  as   a  messenger 


from  heaven  :  And  that  without  acknowledging  and 
receiving  him,  we  should  be  essentially  defective  both 
in  faith  and  practice.  But  this  same  apostle  insists, 
that  we  must  walk  in  newness  of  life  ;  must  crucify 
the  flesh  with  its  affections  and  lusts  ;  must  die  to  sin 
and  live  to  holiness,  and  that  we  must  all  be  judged 
'^  according  to  the  deeds  done  in  the  body."  He  also 
teaches  that  Christ,  though  a  propitiation,  is  made 
such  by  God,  and  "  that  unto  us  there  is  om  Crod,  the 
Father,  of  whom  are  all  things,  and  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  by  whom  are  all  things — that  there  is  one 
God,  and  Father  of  all,  and  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one 
baptism." 

The  apostle  John  declares  the  same  doctrine. 
'^  This  we  testify,"  he  says, ''  that  God  sent  his  Son  to 
be  the  saviour  of  the  world." 

Here  is  no  doctrine  of  a  ^^  Triune  God/^  of  ^^  thi*ee 
]3ersons  in  the  Godhead^' — of  ^^  infinite  satisfaction^' 
made  to  God,  by  the  suiferings  and  death  of  an  infinite 
Being.  It  is  simply  this,  that  God  in  his  great  and 
unmerited  grace  provided  a  redeemer  for  ignorant, 
guilty  men  ;  and  that  through  and  by  him,  his  doc- 
trines, mediation,  sufferings,  deatli  and  resurrection, 
we  are  offered  pardon  and  salvation,  on  sincere  pen- 
itence and  new  obedience  ;  and  thus  the  hope  of  eter- 
nal life  is  confirmed  to  mankind.  We  are  therefore  in- 
different to  the  praise  of  orthodoxy.  Yet  we  trust,  we 
are  evangelical  and  apostolical.  Christ  is  acknowl- 
edged as  the  Messiah  promised  to  the  Jews  ;  by  ap- 
pointment and  qualification  of  God,  the  saviour  of  the 
world,  the  divine  instructer  and  judge  of  mankind. 

Dr.  W.  observes,  that  ^*  the  learned  Dr.  S.  Clark 
belie^^d  in  the  essential  divinity  of  Christ ;"  and  still 
pronounces  "  his  opinion  to  be  erroneous,  and  of  dan- 
gerous tendency."  It  is  well  known  to  all  theologi- 
cal students,  that  Dr.  Clark  was  not  a  Trinitarian^ 
would  not  subscribe  the  Jlthanasian  creed  ;  and  was 
considered  by  his  contemporaries  as  decidedly  Unita- 
7'ian.  His  ideas  were  similar,  in  many  respects,  on 
this  subject  to  those  of  the  ingenious  author  of  ^'^  Bible 


News.''  He  believed  Christ  in  some  sense  a  divine 
person,  though  entirely  distinct  from  the  Father,  on 
whom  he  was  dependent,  and  from  whom  he  received 
his  miraculous  and  exalted  powers  to  be  the  Saviour 
of  men.  He  supposed  him  possessed  of  a  nature  and 
qualities  far  above  human  or  angelic.  And  such  is 
the  opinion  of  many  Unitarians  at  present  in  New 
England. 

But  it  would  seem,  from  Dr.  Ws.  remark  respect- 
ing the  opinion  of  the  celebrated  divine  above  named, 
that  it  is  not  assenting  to  the  essential  divinity  of 
Christ,  but  to  a  particular  and  human  explana- 
tion ofihe  doctrine,  which  will  entitle  us  to  the  sav- 
ing name  of  orthodox.  Dr.  W.  says,  if  we  believe 
Christ  to  be  a  creature,  it  makes  no  difference  (in  his 
judgment)  whether  we  admit  that  he  was  superan- 
gelic,  or  merely  a  man.  Dr.  Clark,  the  author  of 
Bible  News,  and  all  of  their  sentiment,  then,  are  as 
great  heretics  as  Priestley  or  Belsham.  In  fact,  this 
is  the  ground  taken  by  him,  and  the  editor  of  the 
Panoplist,  though  they  deny  having  confounded  the 
various  classes  of  Unitarians.  And  this  it  is,  of 
which  we  have  reason  to  complain.  We  complain, 
that  it  is  both  uncandid  and  unjust.  It  is  uncandid 
to  attempt  to  fasten  unpopular  opinions  upon  those 
who  do  not  hold  to  them,  though  less  hostile  to  them 
than  others  may  be.  It  is  uncandid  to  endeavour  to 
make  Unitarians  of  the  higher  class,  who  believe  in 
Christ  as  the  Son  of  God,  in  some  peculiar  sense,  and 
as  the  mediator  and  redeemer  of  men,  answerable  for 
the  opinions  of  those  who  consider  him  merely  as  a 
good  man  inspired  by  God  to  reveal  his  will,  and  die 
a  martyr  to  the  truth. 

It  is  even  unjust — For  Dr.  W.  must  know  that  Dr. 
Price  and  others  of  his  character  and  sentiments  have 
opposed  and  do  oppose  Socinianism ;  and  consider 
Christ  as  having  suffered  and  died  for  the  sins  of  the 
world  ;  yet  by  the  appointment  and  grace  of  God, 
who  was  pleased  to  ordain  this  method  for  the  recov- 
ery of  sinful  men. 


8 

Dr.  W.  will  perhaps  claim  Dr.  Doddridge  as  a 
Trinitarian.  We  admit  that  he  was  generally  classed 
with  them  ;  yet  he  explicitly  declined  using  many 
phiases  introduced  by  Trinitarians,  as  unscriptural  ; 
and  had  christian  charity  for  those  who  he  knew  de- 
nied the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  When  one  of  his 
church  was  accused  of  being  an  Avian,  and  anti-cal- 
vinisticy  with  a  design  to  censure  and  excommunicate 
him,  Dr.  Doddridge  declared,  "  he  fully  believed  the 
person  accused  a  sincere,  pious  christian  ;  and  soon- 
er than  have  him  censured  for  his  peculiar  faith,  he 
would  give  up  his  place  and  living.^^ 

If  Dr.  W.  means  any  thing,  by   contending,  that 
those  who  do  not  believe  in  a  Trinity ,  in  the  essential^ 
ly  infinite  perfections  of  Christ,  and  his  entire  equality 
with  the  Father,  do  not  receive  the  doctrine  of  atone- 
nient  and  reconciliation  for  sin  by  the  mediation  and 
sufferings  of  the  Saviour,  then  he  must  admit  and  be- 
lieve that  God  suffered,   that  the  infinite  Deity  died 
on  the  cross.     This,  we  think,  he  will  not — But  will 
tell  us,  that,  in  consequence  of  the  union  of  the  divine 
and  human  nature  in  the  person  of  Christ,  though  the 
man  or  human  nature  only  suffered,  yet  there  was  an 
infinite  atonement  made  for  sin.     Indeed,  he  has  said 
this  :  and  so  have  jlthanasians  and  Trinitarians  for 
many  centuries.     This  is  not  new.     But  we  ask   for 
the  ground  and  proof  of  this  notion  in  scripture  ?  and 
we  ask  further,  how  any  Trinitarian   can  show,  that 
there  was  greater  merit  or  value  in  the  sufferings  of  the 
man  Christ  Jesus,  because  the  Deity  had  resided  in 
him,  and  had  been  united  to  him,  than  in  the  suffer- 
ings of  a  super-angelic  Being,  of  great  dignity  and 
powerj  as  the  Arian  Unitarians  represent  Christ  to  be? 
The  passage  quoted  by  Dr.  W.  and  repeated,  from 
Philippians,  "  that  Christ  thought  it  no  robbery  to  be 
equal  with  God,"  it  should  be  remembered,  admits 
a  very  different  translation  from  the  one  in  our  com- 
mon version  ;  and  that  the  argument  and  meaning  of 
the  apostle  rather  requires  it.     Christ,   who   was  in 
the  form  or  image  of  God  ;  that  is,  full  of  grace  and 


9 

truth,  of  divine  wisdom  and  power,  did  not  vainly 
clainif  or  pretendf  or  boast  to  be  equal  with  God,  (aU 
ways  ascribing  his  great  ability,  his  doctrines  and  mi- 
raculous  power  to  the  Father)  but  humbled  himself 
for  our  sakes  and  became  subject  to  death,  &c. 

Dr.  W.  says  much  of  persecution  ;  and  pretends 
there  is  as  great  evidence  of  a  persecuting  spirit  among 
Unitarians,   as  Trinitarians    or  the  ortliodox.      He 
ought  to  know,  and,  we  think,  cannot  but  recollect, 
that  all  the  difficulty  and  obstacles  to   a  free  inter- 
course    and    communion     are    with     his     religious 
friends.     Unitarians  do  not  refuse  to  hold  communion 
with  Trinitarians.     They  often  assist  to  ordain  them  : 
and  they  have  never  called  upon  the  people  to  Avith- 
draw  from  them  and  be  separate.     This   is  the  very 
jet  of  the  late  dispute,     l.^he  editor  of  the  Panoplist 
openly  and   expressly  denounced  the  liberal,  or  Uni- 
tarian clergy,  as  so  grossly  heretical  that  good  people 
ought  to  withdraw  from  them  ;  and  the  people  were 
called  upon  to  do  so  accordingly.     And  this  is  the 
bigotry  and  persecution,  of  which  we  complain.     It  is 
the  same  spirit,  which,  in  other  times,  has  lighted  the 
fagot  around  the  body  of  the  supposed  heretic.     Not 
only  the  liberal  clergy,  but  those  of  the  laity,  who  are 
real    protestauts,   who  call  no    man  master,   except 
Christ,  and  who  prefer  the  word  of  God  to  the  words 
and  tenets  of  men,  enter  their  protest   against  such 
spiritual  tyranny  ;  against  this  claim  to  infallibility, 
this  assumption  of  the  prerogative  of  heaven. 

We  think  the  Trintarians  and  the  high  Calvinists 
to  be  in  error,  to  have  mistaken  the  sense  of  scripture  ; 
to  be  unduly  governed  by  human  creeds  and  confes- 
sions of  faith.  We  lament  this  ;  but  believe  it  consis- 
tent Avith  piety  and  goodness,  and  wish  not  to  censure 
or  disturb  those  who  are  of  this  opinion.  But,  it  can- 
not be  denied,  that  there  has  long  been  a  plan  among 
the  highly  orthodox,  to  render  those  odious  who  do 
not  subscribe  to  their  creed.  They  would  not  hang 
pr  burn.  But  they  do  excite  prejudices  against,  and 
2 


10 

misrepresent  the  opinions  of  the  liberal  christians,  as 
they  are  generally  denominated.  They  attempt  to 
destroy  the  confidence  of  people  in  their  teachers,  by 
calling  them  heretical,  socinian,  &c.  "Whether  this 
is  not  as  unchristian  as  burning,  let  the  intelligent  and 
candid  determine. 

The  apostle  Peter  speaks  of  some  "  who  denied 
the  Lord  who  bought  them."  Dr.  MV.  insinuates  that 
the  Unitarians  do  this.  The  editor  of  the  Panoplist 
had  made  the  same  uncandid  suggestion.  It  is  wish- 
ed to  ascertain  whether  either  of  them  have  the  temer- 
ity to  make  such  a  charge  direct.  The  apostle  says 
nothing  of  a  Trinity,  or  of  a  Triune  God,  or  of  three 
persons  in  the  Deity.  All  this  is  mere  modern  refine- 
ment. But  in  his  time,  there  were  those  who  denied 
Jesus  to  be  the  Christ,  or  Messiah.  Some  who 
taught  Christ  was  merely  a  spirit,  and  never  in  reality 
suflered  on  the  cross.  Some,  who  supposed  Christ 
was  one  Being,  the  Son  of  God  another,  and  the  only 
begotten,  another  still.  They  were  visionary,  licen- 
tious, profligate,  impious  men,  who  rejected  the 
gospel,  and  the  claims  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  to  the 
Messiahship.  These  he  justly  condemns.  But  here 
is  nothing  about  the  Trinity.  This  is  a  fiction  of 
more  recent  times ;  and  has  grown  out  of  the  strange 
theories  of  subtle  and  unintelligible  metaphysicians. 

With  as  little  propriety  does  Dr.  W.  pretend  that 
Unitarians,  who  receive  not  his  notions  of  a  Trinity 
and  of  infinite  atonement  for  sin  by  the  sufferings  and 
death  of  an  infinite  Being  (though  it  is  only  the  hu- 
man nature  he  will  admit  could  suffer)  are  alluded  to 
by  St.  Paul,  when  he  speaks  of  some  in  his  day,  wlio 
preaclred  another  gospel.  He  had  reference  to  Ju- 
daising  christians,  as  is  evident  from  perusing  his 
epistle  to  the  Galatians,  who  taught  tlie  perpetual  ob- 
ligation of  the  ceremonials  of  the  laws  of  Moses,  and 
insisted  that  all  the  Gentiles  must  be  circumcised  and 
observe  every  ritual  enjoined  in  the  Jewish  code. 
This  was  a  doctrine  different  from  and  opposite  to  the 


ii 

preaching  of  the  apostle,  who  only  required  repent- 
ance towards  God,  faith  in  Christ  as  the  IMessiah 
long  expected,  and  a  holy  conformity  to  his  precepts. 
In  the  close  of  his  letter,  Dr.  W.  expresses  a  wish, 
that  we  may  decide  on  this  great  question,  not  hy  pre- 
judice and  party  spirit,  but  by  reason j  conscience  and 
scripture.  x\ll  Unitarians,  all  liberal  christians,  we 
presume,  will  say  "  Jimen^'  to  this  sentiment  and 
wish.  The  Dr.  liowever,  has  taken  up  much  time  in 
condemning  those,  who  exercise  reason  in  interpreting 
scripture  :  and  complains,  that  any  ^  ortiiodox'  opin- 
ions are  rejected,  because  they  appear  irrational  or  ab- 
surd. He  says  the  Unitarians  exalt  human  reason  and 
wisdom  above  the  word  of  orod.  I  will  not  pretend  to 
justify  every  thing  said  cr  written  by  those  who  call 
themselves  rational  christians.  The  true  protestant 
principle  is,  to  exercise  our  reason  in  construing 
scripture,  and  to  nidge  of  its  general,  obvious  and 
uniform  sense,  by  co^aiparing  diiferent  passages,  and 
by  an  interpretation,  according  to  common  sense.  At 
the  same  time,  if  any  thing  is  clearly  and  fully  as- 
serted, to  reeeiva  it,  by  faith,  ou  the  authority  of  the 
inspired  writer. 

The  argument  of  Dr.  W.  and  other  orthodox 
clergymen  proves  too  much  :  For  it  would  oblige  us 
to  receJve  the  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Romish 
church,  and  of  transubstantiation.  For  it  is  express- 
ly said  by  Christ,  in  reference  to  the  sacramental 
bread,  "  this  is  my  body  ;''  and  of  the  wine,  "  this 
is  my  b'ood" — and  "  except  ye  eat  my  flesh  and 
drink  my  bloo  1,  ye  have  no  life  in  you."  The  diffi- 
culty of  the  doctrine  must  not  prevent  our  receiving 
it.  Though  it  is  contrary  to  reason,  philosophy,  and 
common  sense,  yet,  according  to  the  argument  of  Trin- 
itarians we  must  believe  in  transubstantion.  For 
we  must  not  use  our  reason  in  judging,  or  deciding  on 
the  subject.  There  is  no  text  in  the  bible,  which  as- 
serts the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  so  plainly,  so  express- 
ly,  as  the  above  does  the  change  of  the  bread  and 
wine  into  the  real  flesh  and  blood  of  our  Lord, 


We  acknowledge  that  Christ  was  the  special  rep- 
resentative, messenger,  or  agent  of  the  Most  High,  to 
display  the  divine  character  and  power  ;  to  instruct 
and  redeem^the  world.  Highly  figurative  expressions, 
therefore,  are  used  in  speaking  of  hiin,  of  his  dignity, 
power,  wisdom  and  divinity.  But  we  should  always 
recollect,  that  it  is  expressly  declared  that  all  his 
ability  and  wisdom  were  imparted  to  him  by  God,  his 
Father,  the  Sovereign  Loid  of  heaven  and  earth,  for 
the  glorious  purpose  of  reforming  and  saving  man- 
kind. 

We  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that  the  bible 
does  not  expressly  and  explicitly  teach  the  doctrine 
of  a  Trinity  ;  or  of  three  persons  in  ihs  Grodhead,  or 
Deity.  The  dogma  is  adopted  by  some  theologians 
by  way  of  inference  or  construction.  They  reason  on 
the  subject,  and  undertake  to  shew,  that  certain  pas- 
sages establish  the  doctrine.  But  unitarians  have  the 
game  right  to  examine  and  compare  scripture,  and  in- 
terpret for  themselves.  And  the  man  who  judges  and 
condemns  his  brother  /or  his  opinion,  is  rash  and  dog- 
matical ;  and  so  far  is  influenced  by  an  anti- christian 
spirit. 

Dr.  W.  complains,  that  Unitarians  arc  too  general 
in  their  expressions,  when  v.  ilting  on  tLe  character  of 
Christ,  that  they  are  not  sulilcicntly  particular,  dis- 
tinct and  precise.  And  he  considers  it  so  great  a 
fault,  that  it  renders  tlism  unfit  to  be  teachers  of 
Christianity.  But  if  they  ftie  as  particular  and  dis- 
tinct as  the  apostles  were,  this  should  satisfy  us.  In 
their  preaching  to  Jews  and  Gentiles,  we  find  nothing 
said  about  a  Trinity — nothing  of  the  calvinistic  no- 
tion of  an  infinite  atonement  by  the  sufferings  of  an 
infinite  Being.  They  taught,  (as  Unitarians  do  now) 
that  Jesus  of  JSTazareth  was  the  Christ,  the  Messiah, 
long  promised  in  the  Jewish  scriptures  ;  and,  that, 
though  he  had  been  put  to  death,  God  raised  him 
up,  and  exalted  him  to  be  a  Prince  and  Saviour,  to 
dispense  pardon  and  immortality.  The  Unitarians  be- 
lieve with  Peter,  that  ^^  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  the  Son 


13 

of  Grod" — and  "  taught  the  words  of  eternal  life" — 
with  Mary,  that  "  he  is  the  Messiah  or  Saviour,  who 
was  to  come  into  the  world/*'  They  believe  he  is  a 
sufficient  Mediator  and  Redeemer,  having  been  en- 
dowed by  God  with  all  proper  qualities  and  attri- 
butes for  that  great  work. 

We  cannot  but  observe,  that  Trinitarians  appear  to 
us  very  indistinct,  various  and  confused  in  their  lan- 
guage on  the  subject  of  the  present  controversy.  It 
is  well  known,  that  there  are  various  systems  and  the- 
ories among  them  touching  this  doctrine.  '^  AVhat, 
indeed,  is  Trinitarianism,  but  Soeinianism  involved 
in  mystery  ?"  as  the  able  author  of  Bible  JVews  ob- 
served. We  think  there  is  great  obscurity  and  indis- 
tinctness in  their  writings  on  this  subject.  They  talk 
about  an  infinite  atonement  being  made  by  the  suffer- 
ings of  Christ,  merely  as  man,  in  consequence  of  the 
Deity  having  been  united  to  him — For  they  will  not 
assert  that  God  suffered.  This  appears  strange  and 
irrational ;  and  we  think  it  unscriptural.  The  scrip- 
tures speak  of  Christ  as  being  sent  by  God,  and  sin- 
gularly endowed  and  assisted  to  be  our  Saviour,  and 
as  dying  for  our  pardon  and  salvation.  But  the  pe- 
culiarities of  Calvinism,  or  Trinitarianism,  are  mere 
opinions,  or  conclusions  of  certain  divines,  by  them 
adopted  in  their  reasonings,  on  different  texts  of  scrip- 
ture 5  and  by  no  means  necessary  to  be  believed  in 
order  to  be  a  christian,  any  further  than  they  appear 
to  our  deliberate  judgment  to  be  supported  by  the 
word  of  God.  We  are  willing  to  leave  the  subject,  in 
some  sense  as  unexplained  and  incompreliensible  ;  and 
to  speak  of  it  in  the  language  of  scripture.  We  be- 
lieve, that  "  the  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the  Saviour 
of  the  world" — And  we  trust  in  him,  as  the  Redeem- 
er appointed  and  qualified  by  God,  to  direct,  instruct, 
guide,  and  save  us. 

Unitarians  wish  not  to  dictate  articles  of  faith  to 
others  ;  nor  do  they  condemn  those  called  '' orthodox" 
for  avowing  their  opinions.  It  is  the  positive  and 
dogmatical  conduct,  the  censorious,  exclusive  spirit. 


14 

which  Trinitarians  often  discover  on  a  subject  con- 
fessedly mysterious  and  incomprehensible,  which  we 
consider  reprehensible.  We  see  not  that  they  have 
authority  to  be  the  sole  interpreters  of  scripture  ;  or 
to  insist  that  others  should  admit  their  particular  ex- 
planations of  passages  of  high  and  difficult  import. 
And  we  complain,  that  they  should  denounce  those  as 
^^  heretical,"''  as  '•^  having  another  gospel,"  as  "  deny- 
ing the  Lord  who  bought  them,"  who  cannot  subscribe 
to  the  creeds  and  declarations  of  fallible  men.  This 
spirit  is  much  to  be  regretted.  It  ought,  we  think  to  be 
opposed.  It  is  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  protestantism. 
And  we  consider  it  the  duty  of  all  those  who  wish  to 
maintain  the  present  happy  degree  of  christian  liber- 
ty in  New  England,  to  bear  testimony  against  it. 

The  liberal  party,  as  they  are  denominated,  deny 
not  this  liberty  to   their  brethren  of  different  senti- 
ments.    They  consider  the  bible  the  standard  of  faith 
and  rule  of  conduct  :  and  allow  every  one  the  right 
to  construe  and  explain  for  himself,  so  that  he  be  not 
licentious  and  immoral.     We  believe  the  Unitarians 
have  as  great  respect  for,  and  are  as  much  influenced 
by  the  declarations  of  the  bible,  as  those  called  "  or- 
thodox," who  form  creeds  and  articles  of  faith  in  the 
words  of  "•  human  wisdom,"  and  condemn  all  who 
liesitate  to  subscribs  to  them.     We  are  willing  others 
should  have  formulas  of  faith,  and  fix  upon  certain  ar- 
ticles of  doctrine,  as  a  system  or  guide  for  themselves  : 
but  must  claim  the  same  right  and  privilege  on  our 
part.     We  fully  admit  the  authority  of  inspired  scrip- 
ture.    What  is  highly  important  and  essential,  we  be- 
lieve to  be  very  intelligible  and  plain.     What  is  mys- 
terious and  difficult  to  be  understood,  we  leave   for 
every  one  to  consider,  and  to  receive  according  to  his 
own  judgment  and  understanding.     And  we  think  the 
*^  orthodox,"  who  undertake  to  explain  Hie  mysteries 
of  religion,  and  to  dictate  particular  modes  of  belief, 
are  justly  chargeable  with  a  departure  from  the  ^*  sim- 
plicity which  is  in  Christ,"  and  with  substituting  the 
words  of  man  for  the  language  of  inspiration. 


^^2^ 


^^^ 


I 


^ 


